The very USPS page that is linked to from this summary says that batteries that are in devices are generally exempt from this. Essentially you can ship all the iPods/iPads/iPhones you want. It is external (ie not built-in) batteries that have additional restrictions, though those are not very severe.

Which is fascinating, because I've never heard of a watch battery bursting into flame during normal operation, yet this would appear to ban the international shipping of nearly all watches. Lithium ion batteries are a fire risk because of overheating, but probably 99% of the time, the overheating is caused by charging, which lithium primary cells do not do. I understand why you would not want to pack cartons of a hundred lithium primary cells (because if a fire occurs external to the batteries, they tend to intensify it), but a single cell here or there would seem to pose little risk.

Actually, no. Lithium ion batteries are at risk of fire/explosion when they discharge. If you bridge the terminals you end up with a small incendiary device. There's also a risk of fire from poorly made batteries. I believe the Sony exploding laptop batteries that were in the Dell/Apple/etc devices had iron filings mixed in with the battery media in the cells.

No idea why USPS is banning this, we've had restrictions here in Australia for about 5 years now, but no sign of a ban.

Which is fascinating, because I've never heard of a watch battery bursting into flame during normal operation, yet this would appear to ban the international shipping of nearly all watches.

Haha, watches? So what? It also bans the international shipping of nearly all computers, most digital cameras, many telephones... More devices than you might have imagined have lithium batteries for preference retention instead of some kind of NVRAM, and/or to operate a RTC.

Nope, lithium primary cells are quite capable of failing explosively [candlepowerforums.com]. In fact, I think in some ways they're more dangerous than lithium ion batteries because they contain elemental lithium in normal operation. Button cells are probably small enough and rigid enough to be reasonably safe, other lithium cells not so much.

So, what keeps the shippers from sticking a huge resistor and a low-current LED into a plastic housing, shoving the battery in (hey look, it's a low-power long-life flashlight!) and using that to ship? You could make them extra-huge to store backup batteries, even.

So, what keeps the shippers from sticking a huge resistor and a low-current LED into a plastic housing, shoving the battery in (hey look, it's a low-power long-life flashlight!) and using that to ship? You could make them extra-huge to store backup batteries, even.

Why go to the trouble. There's plenty of other shipping companies out there with better reputations and better services. I think if there's any real impact from this change it is that more products will make it to their destinations since they'll be shipped by reputable carriers.

Not also that according to the table (Exhibit 10.20.8 Lithium Battery Mailability Chart [usps.com]). The ones non-mailable are the called primary, which seem to refer to the lithium batteries, not "Secondary" which seem to refer to the Lithium-Ion (rechargeable) batteries.

The very USPS page that is linked to from this summary says that batteries that are in devices are generally exempt from this. Essentially you can ship all the iPods/iPads/iPhones you want. It is external (ie not built-in) batteries that have additional restrictions, though those are not very severe.

Was the "good job not reading" a reference to yourself? Oh, the irony!

According to the USPS, they will prohibit shipping of lithium batteries and any device containing them effective May 16.

And on the USPS page [usps.com] for the restriction, the USPS anticipates that after 1 January 2013 people will be able to resume mailing devices containing lithium batteries to overseas destinations. And that shipping such devices is banned from May 16 this year.

and then the part about being installed in the device - that's not until 2013:

"on January 1, 2013, cusÂtpmers will be able to mail specific quantities of lithium batteries internationally (including to and from an APO, FPO, or DPO location) when the batteries are properly installed in the personal electronic devices they are intended to operate."

The very USPS page that is linked to from this summary says that batteries that are in devices are generally exempt from this. Essentially you can ship all the iPods/iPads/iPhones you want. It is external (ie not built-in) batteries that have additional restrictions, though those are not very severe.

Read it again. It says that the USPS is prohibiting international shipments of lithium cells this year. They anticipate that the UPU and ICAO will allow lithium cells that are enclosed within personal electronic devices, starting 2013. Right now, you are not allowed to ship either the bare cells or cells contained within electronic devices.

IIRC, there have been several incidences in years past where fires have occurred after containers of bulk cells have been damaged by forklifts at airport terminals. Betwe

It's not the USPS but the UPU/ICAO that's banning international shipments of all lithium cells. The USPS is saying that they expect to be able to ship cells that are contained within consumer products in 2013, indicating that UPU and ICAO intend to allow that type of shipment. The USPS still allows some types of shipments within the US.

I doubt that they (UPU/ICAO) will allow bulk shipments of cells. When I worked for an IC manufacturer a few years back, we had some products (modules) that contained an IC an

Only stupid people think a device that stores useful amounts of energy can be inherently "safe". Stupid people are dangerous! If you understand that energy storage has hazards, and take steps to understand and control those hazards, you can be perfectly safe.

Lithium Ion cells can burn or explode during the charging cycle or when shorted. This is simple fact, easily verified (don't breath the smoke!).

This is not normally a problem. In your laptop, the individual cells that make up the battery pack are co

This is an issue with International Postal Union and aviation authorities:

MEDIA STATEMENT ON Outbound International Mailing of Lithium Batteries

REACTIVE ONLY — FOR IMMEDIATE USE

Until January 2013, the Postal Service will not be able to accept packages containing lithium batteries and electronic devices containing lithium batteries addressed to international destinations. This includes mail destined to, or from, APO (Army Post Office), FPO (Fleet Post Office) and DPO (Diplomatic Post Office) locations.

This change is required by the standards of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Universal Postal Union (UPU), both of which currently prohibit lithium batteries in mail shipments that are carried on international commercial air transportation.

So it is a) hopefully temporary b) because the hazardous little bombs are hazardous little bombs and c) everything is complicated these days.

Sounds like the CD I received in the mail once, in a plain envelope, with no jewel case, and no padding. More accurately, what I received was shards of a CD.

In general, an unpadded CD should make to you unscathed through the USPS - I've received hundreds of Netflix DVD's through the mail in their plain paper envelopes. I've received a few scratched and unplayable disks, but not a single broken disk.

If a CD needed padding or a jewel case to prevent significant numbers of them from being damaged, Netflix would be using padded envelopes.

Yeah, I use Netflix too, and I've only seen one cracked disc. But there, the envelope is just the right size and the disc is basically held in place inside. It might be easier to recognize that it's supposed to be rigid than if you just stick a disc in a letter envelope that's too big for it.

As long as our currency is on, near, or above par with the US dollar, most sensible canadians will order stuff from the US and use USPS to deliver it, since UPS and the like are really just crooked extortionists. How their extortionist techniques are legal, I just don't know.

As long as our currency is on, near, or above par with the US dollar, most sensible canadians will order stuff from the US and use USPS to deliver it, since UPS and the like are really just crooked extortionists. How their extortionist techniques are legal, I just don't know.

As long as our currency is on, near, or above par with the US dollar, most sensible canadians will order stuff from the US and use USPS to deliver it, since UPS and the like are really just crooked extortionists. How their extortionist techniques are legal, I just don't know.

Yeah, USPS is probably one of the best shippers around - it's trackable through Canada (USPS stops at the border, but Canada Post tracks it through). It's also cheap. It will cost more to ship via USPS, but you don't pay UPS' extortionate fees to receive the package.

DHL is probably another good one - their fees are pretty reasonable (similar to Canada Post's), but very few American companies support DHL as a shipping option (probably because it sucked inside the US - despite being close or is the #1 worldwide carrier).

After that comes FedEx, because they do flat rate $25+taxes.

UPS - it's probably their cash cow - total bill can be anywhere from 30-200% of the item value. It's so bad that many US stores stopped shipping to Canada because people were refusing packages ($50 for a $40 item?) over the extortionate and gouging fees.

Now, there is ONE saving grace - there's something called "UPS Mail Innovations" that uses UPS within the US, who then hands it off to the local post office or USPS to carry across the border. Costs more than USPS and few know about it, but it's an option.

And it looks to be an ICAO rule, which means every country is affected (but only internationally - local laws can override ICAO if it stays in-country). Though, I suppose USPS just has to innovate and use ground crossings - fly it to the border gateway city, drive it across, and have Canada post continue with it. After all, the only time ICAO really applies is across countries (it's a set of de-facto rules). Though, nothing stops the US and Canada from forming an agreement to allow air transport across the border of batteries.

You can track U.S. Post Office mail to Canada. It's called Global Express and lets you know when the item has been delivered. I started using that after a number of Canadians started claiming "I never got the item". Now that I use tracking, the complaints have disappeared. Hmmm.

Interesting experiment. Is your theory that your customers were lying or that mail carriers were swiping the packages or delivering them to the wrong address or all of these? I recently received someone else's UPS package in my mailbox. Instead of delivering it myself I just left it in the mailbox for a while. Eventually it disappeared. I figure aliens probably took it.

DHL is probably another good one - their fees are pretty reasonable (similar to Canada Post's), but very few American companies support DHL as a shipping option (probably because it sucked inside the US - despite being close or is the #1 worldwide carrier).

DHL ended US-to-US delivery in 2009. They have a service where they'll use the USPS for local delivery, but it's expensive and slow. They also don't do pickup service (for any destination country) in many parts of the US now, so they've made it really hard for US companies to use them. Not all of it is their fault, but it's hard to use DHL if you're in the US now.

I've always preferred UPS for US-Canada shipping (small packages) because their fees are reasonable and they expedite clearing customs. With USPS, it seems like you can get: Global Priority, pay a ridiculous fee, but have the package arrive in a couple of days; or pay a reasonable fee regular parcel post, and have the package get held up for a week or two at the border.

Umm, you are just wrong. The Republicans have been on a privatizing tear that has been well-publicized and nearly non-stop for decades now. Examples include Reagan turning our student loans over to third parties, which jacked up the costs of college (Obama ended this practice, btw). Rick Santorum proposing to end our national weather services' free information so that he could stick his (or his buddies') private company in that place instead. Florida governor Rick Scott foisting a

Um, how about using your favorite search engine to look for things like "wayne county corruption" or "detroit corruption". *All* of the involved in those cases are Democrats.

So get your head out of your ass - some (not all) people who achieve some level of power in politics tend to abuse that power. It doesn't matter what side of the aisle they sit on, but each of the SOBs should be tarred and feathered!

When they arrive with the package at the Canadian destination, they don't just drop it off, they hold it hostage for a previously-unmentioned "brokerage fee", which is often more than the price of the item and the shipping combined.

They don't tell you about it before you order and pay for the item and the shipping. They just show up and, "Nice package we're supposed to deliver to you... be a shame if something happened to it. Seems like if I had a package like this coming to me, I'd pay plenty extra to th

I don't recall hearing much in the way of incidents involving lithium-containing batteries combusting during shipping. This leads me to wonder which of the following is going on. Is it:
1) A response to actual incidents?
2) An over-reaction to the potential of an accident, much like the no-electronic-gadgets rule on airplanes?
3) Something more sinister involving patents and/or protectionism?

Given the USPS's boneheaded management style (e.g. you still can't buy first-class postage on their site, only the much more expensive Priority and Express), I'm thinking option #2, but that's just speculation

Why do people find it so hard to believe someone is doing their job instead of just being out to inconvenience them?

Because it's a lot cheaper to take reasonable care and lose a few planes and/or buildings every so often, than it is to panic and overregulate to the tune of countless billions of dollars per year in job losses and other economic damage.

Think how much farther ahead we'd all be if the Bush administration had taken this advice to heart after 9/11. We may have saved a few Boeings, but we created

It is an ICAO rule. That means that a body of technical people, from dozens of different countries all agreed on that rule. Yeah, you won't find the proceeds published, as some members don't like that, but it is quite hard to get dozens of different countries to unanimously agree on some protectionist procedure.

The article focuses on the shipment of items out of the U.S., but doesn't mention whether the same ban will apply to purchasing these items on eBay from overseas sources

I'm sure every eBay seller and buyer will notify the USPS of the exact contents of their border-crossing packages. And the USPS can tell if they don't. And the TSA is a worthwhile use of taxpayer dollars.

. It seems like this would drive more business away from the already floundering USPS financial situation.

The USPS is struggling because they've been required by a vindictive right-wing to maintain an absurd 75-year pension plan commitment, basically they are being forced to fully fund pension plans for employees who haven't even been born yet.

If they were simply required to do business under the same rules as their competitors, they'd be kicking UPS' punk ass raw.

So, just for clarity let's make sure everyone understands that the USPS is being deliberately engineered to fail by the same vandals and saboteurs who are deliberately engineering our economy to fail.

Can someone explain to me why "vandals and saboteurs" are deliberately crashing the system?

I mean are these Chinese infiltrators or what? Otherwise I can't see a reason unless someone is making a profit (not sure what that has to do with pensions though).

Sure, I'll explain it. Because business interests almost fully control the Republicans and Democrats and don't like any nationalized services or social services. It was decided in the 70s that social programs couldn't be destoryed in legislation, due to popular outcry, so they'd create so much debt for the county that it would be impossible to fund national programs that benefit people. http://thefbm.com/2012/04/16/starving-the-beast/ [thefbm.com]

So, just for clarity let's make sure everyone understands that the USPS is being deliberately engineered to fail by the same vandals and saboteurs who are deliberately engineering our economy to fail.

It passed a unanimous voice vote in the Senate.Before that, it was also passed by voice vote in the House and the motion for a roll call vote was denied.The law that created this fiasco was passed after midnight on the last legislative day of Congress.Our lawmakers just wanted to get the hell out of there.

. It seems like this would drive more business away from the already floundering USPS financial situation

....If they were simply required to do business under the same rules as their competitors

The United States Postal Service is not a business, therefore, it is not run like one. The United States Postal Service is the government. Even a bastard knows this.

The USPS is struggling because they've been required by a vindictive right-wing to maintain an absurd 75-year pension plan commitment,

My grandfather, a postmaster for decades and a life-long Democrat, was the Secretary-Treasurer of the National Association of Postmasters (NAPUS [tinyurl.com]) from 1953 to 1971, and set up that pension plan. That is his baby.

basically they are being forced to fully fund pension plans for employees who haven't even been born yet.

That's brilliant, actually. If only Social Security worked this way, everyone under 45 wouldn't be fucked for retirement, and Social

The USPS is struggling because they've been required by a vindictive right-wing to maintain an absurd 75-year pension plan commitment,

My grandfather, a postmaster for decades and a life-long Democrat, was the Secretary-Treasurer of the National Association of Postmasters (NAPUS) from 1953 to 1971, and set up that pension plan. That is his baby.

If they were simply required to do business under the same rules as their competitors, they'd be kicking UPS' punk ass raw.

There is more to this than just the pension plan issue
USPS is required to serve all areas uniformly (i.e. rural routes that are not worth it). UPS will simply not service sparse rural areas and compete only in the plentiful areas. You can't talk about "capitalist" competition when USPS is forced to serve certain places. Any regular corporation would scale back from lossy areas.
I guess my point is that they should be operated as a government service and not pretend that they are a regular company that can

The real reason is that the price of stamps is mandated by the government, and since the government is doing everything it can to pretend that the inflation is low, they won't allow USPS to raise the prices to be able to survive.

The real reason is that the price of stamps is mandated by the government, and since the government is doing everything it can to pretend that the inflation is low, they won't allow USPS to raise the prices to be able to survive.

Yeah, it's all about stamp prices. Real weighty addition to the thread, moron.

you must be at lest 3 years old, your UID and the manner, in which you express yourself. Shouldn't you put 'are too' in there?

This thread - place where you don't belong, you need to go home and watch teleboobbies, or whatever they brainwash kids with nowadays.

Don't pretend to know something about which you know nothing. I guarantee, you've not put more than 15 minutes into studying the political shenanigans that are destroying the USPS, if you think it's fucking stamp prices. You sit back and armchair criticize a poster, who clearly has a decent grasp of the issue, and you're really just a know nothing. I'm embarrassed for you. You're no different than a Teabagger. An ignorant, loud mouthed schmuck (the three always go together). The best thing intellectua

And Fast Company is whining that the USPS is overreacting because they refuse to ship a product that randomly catches fire and blows up? And sets off other batteries in the same shipment?

The FAA has a whole site on aircraft fires. [faa.gov] All their lithium battery documents appear there. Here are the current US battery rules for air transportation [dot.gov]. Phone batteries usually aren't big enough to be a problem, but as battery sizes move up from "small" to "medium" (laptop batteries) the restrictions get tougher.

Phone batteries usually aren't big enough to be a problem, but as battery sizes move up from "small" to "medium" (laptop batteries) the restrictions get tougher.

Yes, but those were the old restrictions. The new restrictions are "No international shipments of primary or secondary lithium batteries. At all." A watch containing a lithium button cell is forbidden for international shipment under the new rules.

Apparently you're supposed to put out small lithium fires with Halon (ok) and/or WATER, even though lithium metal burns in water.

The advice to first responders [evsafetytraining.org] for Chevy Volts is The battery on fire will not explode. If battery cells reach high enough temperature, they vent and release
electrolyte. Battery electrolyte is flammable. Use copious amounts of water to cool the battery and extinguish
the fire. ABC dry chemical extinguisher will not extinguish a battery fire." What they mean by "copious amounts of water" is a fire hose. Some of the lithium may react with the water, but the water helps contain the fire until the lith

Effective May 16, 2012, the Postal Service will revise Publication 52, Hazardous, Restricted, and Perishable Mail, to indicate that primary lithium metal or lithium alloy (nonrechargeable) cells and batteries, or secondary lithium-ion cells or batteries (rechargeable), a

Which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with the current problem.

Hint: All of you happy Android devices with their oh so standard batteries can be shipped with the batteries either. So you can have your nice electronic device shipped to you safely. Too bad you can't use it though because the battery had to be sent via camel.

Or do you really think the world would be better off if life consisted of D, C, AA and AAA cells?

I suspect this is implemented because the USPS doesn't operate it's own fleet of jets. They contract with commercial airlines. And sine lithium batteries have been the cause of two airline crashes, they don't want to rick killing 100's of people.

It's all crap, a politically strategic move by the republicans in their unending attempts to allow their buddies to privatize each and every government function. They slammed thru a ridiculous edict forcing the USPS to PRE-FUND their retirement pool for almost a century called the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act [messagebase.net] — an incredible piece of ugliness requiring the agency to PRE-PAY the health care benefits not only of current employees, but also of all employees who'll retire during the next 75 y

They're the stand-alone batteries and they are quite volatile unless they're protected and spread around like in a shipment of devices. Just because yours haven't exploded doesn't mean they don't explode. There's internal circuitry in your device that keeps the batteries from exploding. Most, but not all, Li and Li-Ion batteries have the circuitry internally. There's no easy way for me to tell (I'm an EE) so there's not a chance that a USPS worker will know.

The circuitry is strictly to prevent discharge below a minimum voltage and (sometimes) to prevent charging over the max voltage and limit discharge rate.

Naturally, none of that comes in to play when the battery isn't connected to anything.

No matter the size, violently venting with flame is far more common than exploding (to explode, the vents would also have to be sealed shut). That is bad enough since it's quite sufficient to start a fire or set off more LiIon cells in a chain reaction.

Apparently the USPS is subject to "international regulations". If they don't comply, they risk being fined by the "international government", and if they piss of the "international attorney general", they might end up in "international jail".

Apparently the USPS is subject to "international regulations". If they don't comply, they risk being fined by the "international government", and if they piss of the "international attorney general", they might end up in "international jail".
See how fucking silly all this sounds?

Indeed. Makes you wonder how anyone could be deluded enough to mistake that hyperbole for reality...

Lithium batteries, which power many personal electronic devices, can explode or catch fire in certain conditions. In order to get around this, consumer electronic manufacturers such as Apple or Amazon ship their products with a minimal charge--which mitigates the safety risk. Fully charged, improperly stored, or improperly packed lithium batteries do pose a risk of explosion, however. Lithium batteries have been implicated in at least two fatal cargo plane crashes since 2006, including a UPS jet in Dubai.